quade 4 #26 July 6, 2010 QuoteWhat are Muslims going to do for the Space program? set them back 2000 years? The Arab world was literally instrumental in humans understanding of the positions of the stars in the skies. They understood quite a bit about the nature of the universe hundreds of years before western culture. The Arab world, specifically Saudi Arabia, continues to be interested in astronomical positioning. I will admit they seem to be somewhat obsessed with the concept of time, but it's all related. It would be tragic if we left them out of the discussion for any one of a number of reasons. Regardless of what Bolden told the reporter in the interview, part of the reason for international cooperation is diplomatic . . . and I'm ok with that. Mankind as a whole should engage in exploration and saving itself from natural disasters. Let each country participate in whatever way they can. Maybe they know something we don't and maybe their efforts can spare us unnecessary duplication of efforts.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #27 July 6, 2010 QuoteThey understood quite a bit about the nature of the universe hundreds of years before western culture. and I was thin in the mid eighties. Does that mean you want to follow my diet plan today. I hate the diplomacy of inclusion. I think it is perfectly OK...no, it's preferable to try your best to be better than everyone else.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #28 July 6, 2010 Quote . . . it's preferable to try your best to be better than everyone else. Try, sure, but what if the actual best just happens to be some other guy that knows something you don't that's vital to a mission? I think a person would be foolish to just "try" without doing the research to find out if maybe there's something that could be learned from somebody else. Does it make sense for a person to write a book without having somebody proofread it? Would you submit a scientific paper without having somebody else check your math? Would you have brain surgery performed without getting a second opinion?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,532 #29 July 6, 2010 Quoteit's preferable to try your best to be better than everyone elseAnd I think it's preferable to get the best result possible, even if that means it's not mine, or not mine alone. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #30 July 6, 2010 Quote reply] With only two shuttle missions left, what else is NASA going to do? Quote Sad, isn't it? Alas, we give away our technology and then lay back to watch the Russians take the lead...again. Leadership we don't have anymore. That left with our last administrator AND President. To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #31 July 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe US will lose the ability to put man in space for the first time. It is a tragedy of national proportions that is not getting enough visibility. Actually... we didn't have the ability to put man in space between 1975 and 1981. True. However that was not really going to be the case. When Apollo 18,19 and 20 (that were scheduled to fly but didn't) were scrubbed, that stopped the wholesale layoffs and lengthened the fly interval. That was just a handful of years after Apollo before Shuttle. We are now talking of what, a 15 year or more gap? Obama is about to layoff over 5000 of your best and brightest. And during a piss poor economy to boot. My intent was to point out that this crossroads situation has come up before in NASA's manned spaceflight history. The Apollo / Saturn programs had just demonstrated going to the moon, launching and getting to a space station in LEO, and successful international rendezvous and docking. And we abandoned that program. Shuttle has demonstrated excellent up and down mass capability, the largest crew of any single space vehicle, the ability to perform on orbit servicing of satellites, and amazing logistics capabilities in assembling a very large modular space station. And we're abandoning that program. The shame in this, to me, is less about us relying on Soyuz/Dragon/CST-100/whatever to get to low earth orbit and more about the fact that ISS modules were sacked in the process. I'm torn about constellation being cancelled. Yes there's some free drift going on right now, but I'm wondering how it would have fit as a third paragraph to this post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,067 #32 July 6, 2010 >To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. And Russian tax dollars are being launched into our Space Station. Which is a good thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #33 July 6, 2010 Quote Quote reply] With only two shuttle missions left, what else is NASA going to do? Quote Sad, isn't it? Alas, we give away our technology and then lay back to watch the Russians take the lead...again. Leadership we don't have anymore. That left with our last administrator AND President. To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. What up Channing.......yes, we've paid the Russians for over 30 years. Why stop now I guess! lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #34 July 6, 2010 Quote>To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. And Russian tax dollars are being launched into our Space Station. Which is a good thing. Ever read Walt Cunningham's book? He can definitely enlighten you on the Russian space program and our help we've given them over the years... It's sickening. And a link to his recent discussion: http://www.talkingspaceonline.com/home/episode-223-a-true-american-hero.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,067 #35 July 6, 2010 >He can definitely enlighten you on the Russian space >program and our help we've given them over the years... It's sickening. And vice versa. The RD-180, the rocket engine on our Atlas missile, is a Russian design. And of course they are now ferrying all the personnel and supplies for the Space Station for us. I don't see cooperation as a bad thing. Indeed, the country I worry most about in that arena is China - our relations with them are currently poorer and they have no stake in our space program, as we have in Russia's (and they in ours.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #36 July 6, 2010 QuoteAnd vice versa. The RD-180, the rocket engine on our Atlas missile, is a Russian design. Sure, hell we bought the rights to the damn thing! Or some "contractors" did. Besides, we've given wayyyy more than we've ever received. Look, we can argue that we stole technology from the Germans and made it better. But in the end our program will slowly die under the hands of the current adminstration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 July 6, 2010 Quote>To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. And Russian tax dollars are being launched into our Space Station. Which is a good thing. I'm pretty sure you meant the International Space Station that's a collective work between the US, Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada, since "our" space station, Skylab, was de-orbited in 1979...right?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,067 #38 July 6, 2010 >I'm pretty sure you meant the International Space Station that's a >collective work between the US, Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada . . . Definitely. But given the animosity towards cooperation on this thread, I figured I'd refer to it by its largest contributor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #39 July 7, 2010 Quote>I'm pretty sure you meant the International Space Station that's a >collective work between the US, Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada . . . Definitely. But given the animosity towards cooperation on this thread, I figured I'd refer to it by its largest contributor. Uh huh.....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #40 July 7, 2010 QuoteThe RD-180, the rocket engine on our Atlas missile- [nails on chalkboard] The Atlas III and Atlas V are space launch vehicles, not missiles. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #41 July 7, 2010 Quote>To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. And Russian tax dollars are being launched into our Space Station. Which is a good thing. Bill, we give the Russians millions and millions. So much damn corruption in their program, it's sickening. It's our own damned money that's getting them into space! ugh! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,067 #42 July 7, 2010 >The Atlas III and Atlas V are space launch vehicles, not missiles. The SM-65A, 65B, 65C, 65D and 65E were all ICBM's. They were later adapted to function as launchers (as was the case with many early launchers.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #43 July 7, 2010 QuoteBill, we give the Russians millions and millions. So much damn corruption in their program, it's sickening. It's our own damned money that's getting them into space! ugh! There's corruption in every country. That's a weak argument. If you want a good one, it would be that jobs and tax dollars go out of the country. By keeping the manufacture and launches in the US it would solve that problem. Fortunately, that's precisely the direction NASA is heading by opening up space to US commercial ventures.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,067 #44 July 7, 2010 > It's our own damned money that's getting them into space! And getting US into space. We are currently relying on them for transferring people and supplies to the ISS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #45 July 7, 2010 Quote>The Atlas III and Atlas V are space launch vehicles, not missiles. The SM-65A, 65B, 65C, 65D and 65E were all ICBM's. Absolutely... none of which use the RD-180. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #46 July 7, 2010 Quote> It's our own damned money that's getting them into space! And getting US into space. We are currently relying on them for transferring people and supplies to the ISS. How did this thread start? I give up on this thread.... Where are the believers? When I was young I watched us land on the moon. We had vision. We had esprit de corps. We were patriotic, fuck we believed in miracles! Now, everyone is all PC and have their heads stuck so far up the Presidents ass they can't see straight. Sadly, I and most of you reading this will probably not be around to see anybody land on an asteriod or Mars. Peace.......... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #47 July 7, 2010 QuoteWhen I was young I watched us land on the moon. We had vision. We had esprit de corps. We were patriotic, fuck we believed in miracles! Another person that didn't quite understand what the space program was about.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #48 July 7, 2010 Quote To add one point, Our tax dollars are paying for the Russians to take the lead. Stepping back to this post, for just a minute, in what way do you feel the Russians are "taking the lead" in manned space flight? Does the US throwing them a few bucks to keep them building Soyuz, Progress, and DOS modules (which they've been doing in a largely unchanged fashion for 40 years) because it's convenient for our budget really constitute them "taking the lead"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #49 July 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteWhen I was young I watched us land on the moon. We had vision. We had esprit de corps. We were patriotic, fuck we believed in miracles! Another person that didn't quite understand what the space program was about. Get fucking real...... Tell ya what, tomorrow morning when I step into work, I'll ask two of America's finest astronauts what their views are of the current space program and how they felt as children about NASA when we landed on the moon. Bet you a 100 to 1, it'll be more a resemblance of my take on it versus yours........ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #50 July 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhen I was young I watched us land on the moon. We had vision. We had esprit de corps. We were patriotic, fuck we believed in miracles! Another person that didn't quite understand what the space program was about. Get fucking real...... Tell ya what, tomorrow morning when I step into work, I'll ask two of America's finest astronauts what their views are of the current space program and how they felt as children about NASA when we landed on the moon. Bet you a 100 to 1, it'll be more a resemblance of my take on it versus yours........ Awesome, then find a historian and ask him about what Sputnik did for the US space program and why Kennedy said we were going to the Moon. Space exploration was the sizzle that sold the program to the public, but the entire endeavor was a reaction to intercontinental nuclear capabilities. That is the reason we went into space.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites